Van

“As one formerly enslaved man succinctly put it, “white men got plenty chilluns by the nigger women. They didn’t ask them. They just took them.”76 Sexual desire and obsession, backed by racial and male privilege and pride, often led to physical brutalization for those who dared to resist. “Granny,” who had been enslaved in Alabama, recalled that she never developed anything close to a romantic, or even emotionally supportive, relationship with her owner who was the father of her five children. Always afraid that she would be tortured if she refused him, Granny revealed, “I didn’t want him, but I couldn’t do nothin’. I uster say,”
― Daina Berry, Sexuality and Slavery: Reclaiming Intimate Histories in the Americas

“To dehumanize a person is to regard them as subhuman. This is how Abraham Lincoln used the word in his final debate with Stephen Douglas. The Lincoln/Douglas debates revolved around the issue of slavery. Douglas asserted that the Founding Fathers did not have “inferior or degraded” races in mind when they spoke of the equality of men.4 Lincoln responded that Douglas displayed “the tendency to dishumanize the man” (or, in some reports, “dishumanize the negro”) and thereby “take away from him all right to be supposed or considered as human.” When the New York Tribune published his speech, the editors changed his awkward “dishumanize” to”
― David Livingstone Smith, Less Than Human: Why We Demean, Enslave, and Exterminate Others

“True, viruses are nothing more than a tiny bit of genetic material—a single kind of nucleic acid (segmented or nonsegmented, DNA or RNA) and a coat made of protein molecules. Viruses multiply according to the information contained in this nucleic acid. Everything other than the DNA or RNA is dispensable and serves primarily to ensure that the viral nucleic acid gets to the right place in the right sort of cell in the organism hosting the virus. Viruses”
― Michael B.A. Oldstone, Viruses, Plagues, and History: Past, Present and Future

“century America was a country, wrote Fritsch, that had finally learned the error of its egalitarian ways: “America, soaked in ideas of freedom and equality, has hitherto accorded equal rights to all races. But it finds itself compelled to revise its attitudes and its laws and create restrictions on Negroes and Chinese.”82 To Fritsch, the history of American immigration law offered a parable on the dangers of ignoring race in favor of a foolish egalitarianism. As we shall see shortly, Hitler and other Nazis would often repeat Fritsch’s interpretive line.”
― James Q. Whitman, Hitler's American Model: The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law